Findings from Team C

Team C consists of three females, Dawn, Winnie and Samantha (pseudonyms) who are friends. The team discussion started very task focused with Dawn initiating the discussion for the first proj ect. Team members also expressed their expectations for the task. For instance, Samantha clarified, “so we are supposed to search for information and categorize and organized into points ”, with Dawn swiftly responding with agreement. The implicit norm in this group was that brainstorming of ideas was first. Besides sharing URLs during this phase, this group also typed their points into the messaging client, allowing all members to read the points easily. When one member wrote their point or URL, the others would normally respond by concurring or providing supporting comments. As they were brainstorming, Dawn informed the group that she was compiling the points for the group, which was met with agreement by the other members. In this way, Dawn emerged as the leader for the group. Besides compiling, she actively facilitated the discussion, contributed points and responded to discussions by other members.

For the second task, the group was also rela­tively focused, and aimed to finish the project. There was no discussion about group norms but members understood that brainstorming came first before the compilation. For this question, Winnie had very strong opinions on the answer. Dawn, the emergent leader, agreed to her points while Samantha did not respond. This led to Dawn directly seeking Samantha’s opinion. Samantha replied with a hesitant “I guess so”. Later, she suggested another point to the team. Winnie then re sponded that they could only have one point, and sought a way to combine both oftheir ideas through a broader point. To Winnie, this represented a win-win situation for both Winnie and Samantha. However, Samantha held back on her comments and instead, opened a private chat window with Dawn, who she was closer to, to discuss the points. Samantha felt uncertain about the point that Win­nie raised, but after discussion with Dawn, was more able to accept the revised point.

To ensure that all members were satisfied with the project, Dawn compiled a first draft of the project and ensured that both Samantha and Winnie were able to read and edit the draft. All parties were then able to resolve their differences and agree to a set of answers for the project. Towards the end, Winnie’s gratefulness for the smooth work coordination resulted in her thank­ing Dawn for the work.

Due to the differing opinions, the group took a slightly longer time to perform the second task compared to the first. However, from the inter­views, members felt that they learnt more from the first structured task than the second, as many of them had prior knowledge of the second task. Still, members enjoyed the second task more than the first as it was more interesting to them. In this team, all members remarked that they all contributed “very equally” to the tasks. Students were satisfied with the collaboration process and the team’s overall performance was second to the other teams.